Won’t it be so much fun when you have to pay for website “bundles” like they’re TV channels? The web is getting so centralized that maybe they’ll stop offering connections to anything other than Facebook and Shitter if you don’t pay for “unlimited” access.
Would be kinda convenient to make it harder to access fediverse platforms, or anywhere else that doesn’t moderate against any ideas to the left of Reagan.
Considering the amount of damage some of the things cause to people, I really do wonder what lengths people will go to, to continue indulging on their brain rot. Yes please, bundle all of the shitty social media platforms possible and put a $40 tag on it. Let’s see how many people are willing to pay, to spread their toxicity and radicalized ideas. I would love to see the stats on that.
The bad sites are likely the ones to not require a fee to access. It would be smaller sites and the Fediverse that would become more difficult and expensive to access.
Why pay to access Mastodon or Lemmy when you can use Twitter and Reddit for “free”. It’s a scheme that would benefit large corporations over smaller independent services.
Lemmy and mastodon servers aren’t going to collect your ID to make sure you can look at porn. Realistically, small sites are not going to have the moderation required to keep in compliance with those laws - if corpos like Aylo (which owns Pornhub, Brazzers, Red Tube - really a shit ton of porn sites, which could be a fun discussion about capitalism consolidation as well) think it’s too much effort and are just throwing up geoblocks - how many smaller sites will be forced to do the same?
Or even the potential to switch to a “whitelist” internet. Only being able to access websites which are “appropriately” moderated.
Large corporations would be able to afford to make deals with ISPs to give them preferential treatment so that access to their sites are faster than others. This is good for social media sites whose whole business model is monetizing their users. Things like the Fediverse would be hit especially hard because of its distributed nature.
ISPs can offer further tiers of plans making it more expensive to access websites that don’t belong to major corporations bribing the ISPs. All the corporations win in this scheme while furthering the enshittification of the Internet.
Want to use Linux? Accessing those sites is difficult and expensive so why not use Windows instead
Want to use Mastodon? Sorry but that sites super slow so how about Twitter instead.
Want to use end to end encrypted email? Too bad. The connection their servers are super spotty. Better use Gmail or Yahoo for email like everyone else.
No. The biggest mainstream players in social media are all already aligned with the current administration. Meta et al. would be the ones to be available for free, and alternatives will be paywalled.
I think the other party was slightly misunderstood. They don’t want to bundle up social media and make that the only option, they want to add a $40 hurdle to accessing the most popular forms of brain rot and leave the rest alone. At least that’s the vibe I got
Goodbye net neutrality.
Won’t it be so much fun when you have to pay for website “bundles” like they’re TV channels? The web is getting so centralized that maybe they’ll stop offering connections to anything other than Facebook and Shitter if you don’t pay for “unlimited” access.
Would be kinda convenient to make it harder to access fediverse platforms, or anywhere else that doesn’t moderate against any ideas to the left of Reagan.
We can still fight back on the state level. States and local levels will lead the way for progress here
California got a state law to enforce net neutrality in 2018. This is a good part of what limited the damage of Trump overturning it the first time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_Protection_and_Net_Neutrality_Act_of_2018
I already can’t access Pornhub in my state. Some states will lead the way for progress, others will be regressive as hell.
(It’s funny, because the stuff you can see on e621 and Gelbooru can be way more disturbing than anything on Pornhub, but both are still accessible).
That’s always been the issue with laws like this, just causes people to find worse things.
Banning alcohol lead to people dying from bootleg. Making drugs illegal lead to things like people huffing paint (maybe cost too).
Considering the amount of damage some of the things cause to people, I really do wonder what lengths people will go to, to continue indulging on their brain rot. Yes please, bundle all of the shitty social media platforms possible and put a $40 tag on it. Let’s see how many people are willing to pay, to spread their toxicity and radicalized ideas. I would love to see the stats on that.
Also Net Neutrality is kind of dead already.
The bad sites are likely the ones to not require a fee to access. It would be smaller sites and the Fediverse that would become more difficult and expensive to access.
Why pay to access Mastodon or Lemmy when you can use Twitter and Reddit for “free”. It’s a scheme that would benefit large corporations over smaller independent services.
Beyond that - with the porn bans:
Lemmy and mastodon servers aren’t going to collect your ID to make sure you can look at porn. Realistically, small sites are not going to have the moderation required to keep in compliance with those laws - if corpos like Aylo (which owns Pornhub, Brazzers, Red Tube - really a shit ton of porn sites, which could be a fun discussion about capitalism consolidation as well) think it’s too much effort and are just throwing up geoblocks - how many smaller sites will be forced to do the same?
Or even the potential to switch to a “whitelist” internet. Only being able to access websites which are “appropriately” moderated.
How would you be so sure? So few know of the Fediverse and most don’t see it as a comparison to things like Facebook, Reddit .etc
They don’t need to know who the small fish are, they just need to know who isn’t a big fish.
Large corporations would be able to afford to make deals with ISPs to give them preferential treatment so that access to their sites are faster than others. This is good for social media sites whose whole business model is monetizing their users. Things like the Fediverse would be hit especially hard because of its distributed nature.
ISPs can offer further tiers of plans making it more expensive to access websites that don’t belong to major corporations bribing the ISPs. All the corporations win in this scheme while furthering the enshittification of the Internet.
Want to use Linux? Accessing those sites is difficult and expensive so why not use Windows instead
Want to use Mastodon? Sorry but that sites super slow so how about Twitter instead.
Want to use end to end encrypted email? Too bad. The connection their servers are super spotty. Better use Gmail or Yahoo for email like everyone else.
No. The biggest mainstream players in social media are all already aligned with the current administration. Meta et al. would be the ones to be available for free, and alternatives will be paywalled.
Uhh, no. You don’t get it, really.
You have a lot of catching up to do. Good luck.
I think the other party was slightly misunderstood. They don’t want to bundle up social media and make that the only option, they want to add a $40 hurdle to accessing the most popular forms of brain rot and leave the rest alone. At least that’s the vibe I got
Replied down the line, was my interpretation any more accurate?